Haryana

Panchkula

CC/223/2018

KULDEEP GARG - Complainant(s)

Versus

SH.MUKESH SHARMA - Opp.Party(s)

S.D BANSAL

07 Jul 2021

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PANCHKULA.                               

Consumer Complaint No.	:	223 of 2018
Date of Institution	:	14.11.2018
Date of Decision	:	07.07.2021

Kuldeep Garg, Proprietor of Shri Balaji Trading House, Service Booth No. 124, Sector 16, Panchkula, Haryana.

                                                                                             ­….Complainant

Versus

1. Sh. Mukesh Sharma, Managing Director, Pratigya Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., SF 36, Pearl’s Omaxe Tower, Netaji Subhash Place, Above Skoda Car Showroom, Prtiampura, New Delhi-110034.
2. Sh. Suresh Sharma, Chairman cum Managing Director, Pratigya Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 44, Sector 27-28, Industrial Area, Hisar, Haryana.
3. Managing Director, Pratigya Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., SF 36, Pearl’s Omaxe Tower, Netaji Subhash Place, Above Skoda Car Showroom, Prtiampura, New Delhi-110034.
4. Chairman cum Managing Director, Pratigya Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. 44, Sector 27-28, Industrial Area, Hisar, Haryana.

                                                                        ….Opposite Parties

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 35 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 2019.

Before:         Mr.Satpal, President.      

                     Dr.Pawan Kumar Saini, Member.

                     Dr.SushmaGarg, Member.

 

Present:-      Complainant in person.

                     None for the OPs.

 

Today the case is fixed for arguments. At this stage, the complainant, by making a separate statement, stated that he does not want to pursue with the present complaint due to some technical reasons, hence, he wants to withdraw the same, with liberty to file it afresh, in the Competent Court, as per the provisions of law. The Complainant also requested that the limitation period may kindly be extended.

                     Heard. In view of the statement made by the Complainant, the present complaint is hereby dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to file it afresh before the appropriate Authority/Court/Commission. However, the complainant is at liberty to approach the appropriate Court/Commission if he so advised and in that eventuality, the period/time spent before this Commission shall not be counted towards the period of limitation for approaching the appropriate Court/Commission. Exemption of time spent before this Commission is granted in terms  of the judgment  of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the titled “Laxmi Engineering Works Vs. PSG Industrial Institute (1995) 3 SCC page 583.

                     A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs and File be consigned to record room after due compliance.

Dt.                     (Dr.Sushma Garg)       (Dr.Pawan Kumar Saini)           (Satpal)

07.07.2021              Member                           Member                            President